The slaughtering of a calf in public in Kerala's Kannur by Youth Congress activists is totally condemnable and smack of a communal mindset. It is an affront to the religious practices of people in India. Elsewhere in other parts of the country, much hue and cry has been raised on the passing of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Rules, 2017, terming it as total ban on eating choice of certain sections of the society in India. But a careful study of these new rules as notified by the Centre on 23 May, only regulates the manner in which animal markets are supposed to function, and how the animals brought for trade are to be treated there. These rules do not, at any point, ban cow slaughter though there are certain provisions that relate to the slaughter of cattle. The rules have not been introduced all of a sudden. A draft version was placed in the public domain in January. J&K has already a law of its own on banning cow slaughter since the days of Maharaja. However, how far the law is implemented is altogether a different story.
The bulk of the new Rules are devoted to detailing how the cattle are to be treated, who is responsible for the proper management of animal markets and so on. The new rules can be traced to the directions of the Supreme Court last year in the context of a public interest litigation filed to put an end to cross-border cattle smuggling from India to Nepal. The Ministry of Environment and Forests then undertook to issue new rules under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, within six months, to check such cross-border cattle smuggling. These Rules attempt to do so by directing that animal markets not be located within 50 km of any international border.
The controversial part of the Rules seems to be Rule 22, which seems to suggest that animals sold in the markets cannot be slaughtered. While this Rule has been interpreted to be a ban on the sale of cattle for slaughter, it is actually a direction for rules relating to the sale and purchase of animals to be complied with such as keeping a record of name and address of the purchaser and procure his identity proof all the way to something more wide-ranging such as ensuring that the purchaser of the cattle does not sell the animal for the purpose of slaughter only.
It is also pertinent to recall here that the Constitution of India does exhort the State to prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves and other milch and draught cattle. The Founding Fathers of the Constitution did see it as an issue of importance and hence came up with such a line. When the Constitution is brought up and iterated as being the most sacrosanct, why not use the same line here?
The point is, the brouhaha, especially from certain sections of the Opposition, are certainly over the top. Yes, there has been an increasing campaign to save the cows. But that is on expected lines. Cow indeed is sacred for Hindus.
But having said that, it is imperative for the government to put at ease any misgivings over whether it is overarching and interfering in personal choices. What one eats is one's will. The State has no right over that. The government has to keep in check certain overzealous elements that are using the occasion and mood to carry out their lumpen activities.
